How did the thief know?...

[Gold fish]

that jesus was who he said he was?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

that jesus was who he said he was?

it was an intimate knowing. Some things, you just know.

 

[ewq1938]

Good chance he saw Jesus perform miracles.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Good chance he saw Jesus perform miracles.

Gospel side stories, the thief was the guy picking people's pockets whenever Jesus was preaching, because He always drew a crowd.

 

[Clare73]

that jesus was who he said he was?

The only way anyone knows. . .by the Holy Spirit.

 

[HTacianas]

that jesus was who he said he was?

Either by faith or he took a stab at it in desperation.

 

[RDKirk]

Just because he was a thief doesn't mean he wasn't paying attention.

 

[Reluctant Theologian]

that jesus was who he said he was?

He indeed, like others replied, may have listened to or heard about Jesus' teaching earlier on. Having said that, it would be very unlikely he would have full Christological knowledge or even know the full picture of how salvation works. As even the disciples hardly understood that at that point in time.

So in all likelihood he didn't know Jesus really had to die for his own sins, or why - Jesus didn't really expand on atonement theory during his ministry on earth. Explicit statements on that we only see appear later on in Acts and Paul's letters; probably as the Apostles awareness and knowledge grew on that too.

The mere fact he put his trust in Jesus as the Messiah or Son of God was enough for him; and for God and Jesus as well apparently. It is some consolation for us now we don't need the perfect theological understanding on how everything fits together; trusting (=have faith) Jesus is sufficient. E.g. look at Mark 5:34 (story of the bleeding woman touching Jesus); she heard Jesus and put her trust/faith in Him; took action; and that trust/faith/action healed her.

It would be unwarranted to assume this woman would be able to know or rephrase the theological truths as found in e.g. the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed; her simple trust/faith evidenced by action was enough. Isn't that beautiful?

 

[sandman]

that jesus was who he said he was?

Jesus Christ's fame was pretty well known.

But I believe it was one of the malefactors.... not one of the thief's. Both of the thief's cast the same in his teeth.

 

[RDKirk]

J
But I believe it was one of the malefactors.... not one of the thief's. Both of the thief's cast the same in his teeth.

What?

 

[sandman]

What?

Luke 23:39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.

Matthew 27:44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.

 

[RDKirk]

Luke 23:39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.

Matthew 27:44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.

The thieves and the malefactors (evildoers) are the same two men.

 

[sandman]

The thieves and the malefactors (evildoers) are the same two men.

There were four crucified with Christ. Two malefactors dyo kakourgos that were led with him. One of the malefactors railed on him. (Luke)

It wasn’t until after the superscription was placed over him that the two thieves dyo lēstēs were brought where both of them cast the same in his teeth (Matthew & Mark)



Luke 23: 32-34, 38-43

23:32 And there were also two other, malefactors (kakourgos) led with him to be put to death.

23:33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.

23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.



23:38 And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

23:39 And one of the malefactors (kakourgos) which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.

23:40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?

23:41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.

23:42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.

23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee to day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.


Matthew 27

27:37 And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

27:38 Then were there two thieves (dyo lēstēs) crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

27:44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.

Mark

15:27 And with him they crucify two thieves (dyo lēstēs) the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.

15:28 And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.


John 19

19:18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him on either side _ _ _, and Jesus in the midst.

The word “one” after the word side in verse 19 is omitted in every critical Greek text. It was added by translators (check any Greek/English Interlinear)

The phrase on either side is the Greek word enteuthen kai enteuthen…..It means - on this side, and on that side…………. Meaning two on this side and two on that side and Jesus in the midst.



John 19:32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.

19:33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:

When the soldiers were expediting the death of those crucified due to the upcoming High Sabbath which started at sunset. They broke the legs of the first then of the other ➡ the Greek word is allos, which is the other (the second) of two when there are more.

When only two

In Luke 23:32 And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death.

The other/other is heteros used in this verse …. as the second of two, when there is only two.



(Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th (Cambridge) edition, volume i, pages 762, 763).

"In the Roman Catholic church . . . the altar-slab or 'table' alone is consecrated, and in sign of this are cut in its upper surface five Greek crosses, one in the center and one in each corner . . . but the history of the origin and development of this practice is not fully worked out" This practice may possibly be explained by the subject of this Appendix.

 

[ewq1938]

Matthew 27:42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.
Matthew 27:43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.
Matthew 27:44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.

Others were mocking by saying this but I don't think the thieves did the same thing...they "cast the same in his teeth" which I interpret to be they also wondered why Christ didn't save himself...but for other reasons than the priests were saying it. Even if they did mock the same as the others did, perhaps it was an initial reaction of anger and fear of their own deaths but after awhile I highly doubt they would be in the mood to be mocking anyone.

I think its important that there are gospels that don't mention the one who believed in Christ and what Christ said to him...I happen to believe it was still one of these thieves mentioned right here but that the conversation isnt recorded for whatever reason. Perhaps after awhile and the fate set in his mind, the one reached out to Christ and said what is recorded in the other gospel.


I also find it important that no gospel says Christ was crucified with four others...its always two others and I do not see it ever adding a second two.


John 19:18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.

Again, John records only two crucified with Christ.


John 19:32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.
John 19:33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:


Here they come to the first, then go to the other who is on the other side and then return back to Christ lastly. Perhaps he looked deader than the others and they decided to deal with the other two first...or for some divine reason Christ was come to lastly...who knows but I don't see this as anywhere saying they approached the first two on one side and then came to Christ...its pretty clear there were only three from the beginning to the end.



Matthew 27:38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

Mark 15:27 And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.

Luke 23:33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.

John 19:18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.


I see no disharmony or conflicts in the four gospels. Christ was crucified with two others, one on Christ's right hand, one on His left hand...no more or less.

 

[michael21]

that jesus was who he said he was?

No one can come to me unless the father draws them John 6:65
The Father draws people from a cross section of society, even a thief on a cross

 

[Bob Crowley]

We don't know how he "knew" if indeed he did "know". It may have been an act of desperation of a man with nothing left to lose.

It may have been God working through him. We don't know.

I doubt very much if he realised just who Christ was. I also think he was more than a thief, quite possibly a Zealot. I don't think the Romans bothered to crucify thieves, but I'm not sure of that. They always needed rowers for their galleys and workers for their salt mines.

If he'd been a Zealot he may have known Judas Iscariot, who would have told him about the miracles Christ performed. I think if Judas was stealing from the money bag, it was to help fund the Zealot movement. Weapons cost money - even back then.

I think Judas tried to force Christ's hand into opposing the Romans. He'd seen Christ perform miracles first hand, and part of the Jewish expectation at that time was that the Messiah would get rid of the Romans. I think he tried to back Jesus into a corner so He'd be forced to oppose the Romans. If anyone could get rid of the accursed Romans, He could. Most of Christ's miracles helped people, but Judas may have seen Christ in a rage when he used the whip in the temple, and it probably left an impression. He killed the fig tree so that overnight it withered to the roots. He'd been on the boat when Christ walked on water and stilled a storm.

But Christ didn't react the way he expected. When Judas realised his mistake, he was quick to get rid of the money - he just threw it down. Not exactly the actions of a habitual thief. It wasn't really the money he was interested in.

Whether the crucified "thief" knew about this I don't know. It might be the reason Luke used the term "malefactor" compared to Mathew and Mark who used "thief", but then I'm not an expert in Greek. They're the same two men, but the Gospel writers used different terms.

There were only two as the Roman soldiers broke the legs of two men only - John 19:32 NIV "The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other."

To sum up - we don't know, like a number of other things that we'll never find out till we get to Glory (if we get there) and our questions are answered by the God who does know.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

The thief went to Paradise with Jesus because Jesus said he could. That's it.